4.7 Article

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Improves Naming Reaction Time in Fluent Aphasia A Double-Blind, Sham-Controlled Study

Journal

STROKE
Volume 42, Issue 3, Pages 819-821

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.110.600288

Keywords

anomia; brain stimulation; recovery; stroke; tDCS

Funding

  1. National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders [DC008355, DC009571]
  2. National Institute for Neurological Disorders and Stroke [NS054266]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background and Purpose-Previous evidence suggests that anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (A-tDCS) applied to the left hemisphere can improve aphasic participants' ability to name common objects. The current study further examined this issue in a more tightly controlled experiment in participants with fluent aphasia. Methods-We examined the effect of A-tDCS on reaction time during overt picture naming in 8 chronic stroke participants. Anode electrode placement targeted perilesional brain regions that showed the greatest activation on a pretreatment functional MRI scan administered during overt picture naming with the reference cathode electrode placed on the contralateral forehead. A-tDCS (1 mA; 20-minute) was compared with sham tDCS (S-tDCS) in a crossover design. Participants received 10 sessions of computerized anomia treatment; 5 sessions included A-tDCS and 5 included S-tDCS. Results-Coupling A-tDCS with behavioral language treatment reduced reaction time during naming of trained items immediately posttreatment (Z=1.96, P=0.025) and at subsequent testing 3 weeks later (Z=2.52, P=0.006). Conclusions-A-tDCS administered during language treatment decreased processing time during picture naming by fluent aphasic participants. Additional studies combining A-tDCS, an inexpensive method with no reported serious side effects, with behavioral language therapy are recommended. (Stroke. 2011;42:819-821.)

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available